The Administration Thread

[therealhantsram]

12 minutes ago, hintonsboots said:

Any link T’Bolton deal mate ?

Read an article last week. Sorry don't know where.

Summary is that Bolton did a deal for 35p over 2 years; but have since failed to meet that payment, asked for an extension to 3 years, which was apparently granted.

[therealhantsram]

2 minutes ago, Manchester Ram said:

Anyone know if this means we have to operate under a transfer embargo for those 3 years in that case?

Similar... an "agreed business plan".

I can't see that business plan allowing DCFC to pay transfer fees though, when there are creditors still owed money. I reckon it'll be free transfers only for 3 years.

[davenportram]

Wow - looks like someone’s finally caught up with what I posted weeks ago. I’d we didn’t have to pay 25p in the pound to avoid sanction.

 

its been the case for years that it’s a choice if 25p in the pound up front or 35p in the pound over a payment plan. 

[davenportram]

1 hour ago, RamBeauIV said:

It might be to accommodate a payment plan for HMRC over 3 years if they aren't gonna settle for 25% now.  An extra year of EFL budget scrutiny and restrictions is the downside.

EFL rules have included the option of 35p in the pour over a payment plan instead of 25p in the pound as a lump sum - it’s just that most people have ignored it, including journalists, because it’s easier to say we are doomed.

[davenportram]

24 minutes ago, therealhantsram said:

Similar... an "agreed business plan".

I can't see that business plan allowing DCFC to pay transfer fees though, when there are creditors still owed money. I reckon it'll be free transfers only for 3 years.

Not true, the agreement in place would mean we’d have to live within our means taking that into account. Exiting administration with an agreement in place wouldn’t mean we can’t pay fees

[Animal is a Ram]

 

[davenportram]

In fact the 35p in the pound option has been there since 2015.

 

https://www.restructuring-globalview.com/2015/06/english-football-league-toughens-stance-on-administrations/

[RoyMac5]

9 minutes ago, davenportram said:

Not true, the agreement in place would mean we’d have to live within our means taking that into account. Exiting administration with an agreement in place wouldn’t mean we can’t pay fees

Does 35p in the pound over 3 years suggest that the Club will be paying the debts out of it's own income?

[davenportram]

2 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Does 35p in the pound over 3 years suggest that the Club will be paying the debts out of it's own income?

Possibly, not sure. But with any agreement plan it’s got to come from somewhere 

Edited April 12, 2022 by davenportram

[Ken Tram]

3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Does 35p in the pound over 3 years suggest that the Club will be paying the debts out of it's own income?

This might explain why someone would choose to pay 35p per £ rather than 25p per £.

[IslandExile]

3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Does 35p in the pound over 3 years suggest that the Club will be paying the debts out of it's own income?

I don't have a problem with that - after all they are the club's debts, even if the previous owner allowed them to get out of hand.

Isn't it Manchester United where the American owners had the club borrow the money for them to buy the club - something whacky like that?

[B4ev6is]

40 minutes ago, therealhantsram said:

Similar... an "agreed business plan".

I can't see that business plan allowing DCFC to pay transfer fees though, when there are creditors still owed money. I reckon it'll be free transfers only for 3 years.

I think you can pay fees but only small ones I think

 

[IslandExile]

Just now, B4ev6is said:

I think you can pay fees but only small ones I think

Yeah but wages will come into it aswell.

I mean Mbappe is out of contract so won't command a fee, but I bet he'll demand more than a packet of hob-nobs to play each week.

? Maybe, if we made them plain chocolate hob-nobs we might have a chance, but would the EFL approve of such lavishness.

[Ewe Ram]

1 hour ago, TuffLuff said:

Just read Nixon’s patreon post (via ramswriter pod on Twitter) and it only says paying 35p in the £1 is only a possibility so maybe don’t get too excited!

Sounds like there has been some postive movement though.

And didn’t Nicko get mardy about that. Can’t blame him mind you, he puts his updates behind a paywall and someone screen shots it and puts it on Twitter ?

[PistoldPete]

13 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Does 35p in the pound over 3 years suggest that the Club will be paying the debts out of it's own income?

Paid by bitcoin. 

[RadioactiveWaste]

6 minutes ago, IslandExile said:

I don't have a problem with that - after all they are the club's debts, even if the previous owner allowed them to get out of hand.

Isn't it Manchester United where the American owners had the club borrow the money for them to buy the club - something whacky like that?

Leveraged buyout. You borrow the money against the business you're buying with it.

It's not uncommon but highly leveraged businesses are quite often beholden to the debt, especially if things start to go wrong. Yes, man uwas entirely bought that way.

[Ghost of Clough]

1 hour ago, Tombo said:

I'm not sure I understand your distinction but from the meeting with the EFL today it seems that paying 35p on the pound is a realistic option that both sides are open to

Up until now we were led to believe the bid didn't even meet the 25p in the pound threshold and the meeting today was to discuss whether we could get the 15 point penalty this season rather than next.

So to now willingly jump up to 35p seems bizarre. 

[Gritstone Ram]

7 minutes ago, IslandExile said:

Yeah but wages will come into it aswell.

I mean Mbappe is out of contract so won't command a fee, but I bet he'll demand more than a packet of hob-nobs to play each week.

? Maybe, if we made them plain chocolate hob-nobs we might have a chance, but would the EFL approve of such lavishness.

Or get the Milk Chocolate Oaties from Aldi.

[RadioactiveWaste]

24 minutes ago, davenportram said:

Not true, the agreement in place would mean we’d have to live within our means taking that into account. Exiting administration with an agreement in place wouldn’t mean we can’t pay fees

Yeah, I'm sure there'll be restrictions but it's a business plan and not an embargo.

It'll have to include meeting obligations on payments and so on.

Probably it'll stipulate a wage cap, individual wage limits, limit on transfer fees and maybe other restrictions on squad size etc.

But, it'll have to be workable. If its not, cK can walk away, and Rooney would say "I can do no more" as well.

[Jortat]

Let’s just hope everyone gets behind CK now and I think he has shown he is not a tyre kicker as he is addressing the correct problems first.

A lot of the criticisms towards him seem petty considering the alternative of liquidation.

There may have been a few bidders in the background but he has come back and stepped up to put his money where his mouth is and trying to right the wrongs from our previous owner.

I am just pleased that we were lucky enough to get someone like him to take a chance on us as the other option of losing my club would have totally devastated me.

I know the takeover is not complete yet but I for one will be giving him 100% support and at last I feel positive about Derby’s future which is great after the last year of depression and negative news surrounding our great club.